Ruling overturned on Kauai dam break claims

The dam at Kauai's Kaloko Reservoir failed in 2006, killing seven people downstream.

LIHUE >>
Kilauea Irrigation Company is responsible for defending the state
against lawsuits brought in the aftermath of a deadly 2006 Kauai dam
break, a state appeals court has found.

The state Intermediate
Court of Appeals ruling says Kilauea Irrigation has a responsibility to
defend claims against the state regarding care and maintenance of the Ka
Loko dam and spillway prior to the disaster, the Garden Island reported
Tuesday.

Seven
people were killed after the dam collapsed and hundreds of gallons of
water rushed downhill. Various lawsuits were filed after the break.
Some are still pending. Then-primary landowner James Pflueger pleaded no
contest to reckless endangering in the criminal case.

The ruling sends the Kilauea case back to Circuit Court. The company didn't file a challenge to the state's appeal.

A
permit at the time allowed Kilauea Irrigation to construct, operate,
repair and maintain a water transportation system within the Ka Loko
ditch right-of-way and the Puu Ka Ele stream. The permit required "due
care" regarding public safety and to indemnify the state from claims of
damage, injury or death arising from failure to maintain the permit.

A
lower court judge had granted a state motion arguing Kilauea Irrigation
was obligated to defend the state against allegations of premises or
property ownership. But the judge ruled Kilauea Irrigation was not
obligated to defend claims that the state was aware the dam was in
questionable condition, that the state did not require repair or
replacement and that the state did not intervene when the public utility
failed to meet inspection obligations.

Deputy State Attorney
General Reese Nakamura said the appeals court ruled that under Hawaii
law, a court can't both grant in part and deny in part one motion
regarding claims in the case.

"The ruling states that Kilauea Irrigation Company has to defend on all claims," Nakamura said.

By participating in online discussions you acknowledge that you have agreed to the TERMS OF SERVICE. An insightful discussion of ideas and viewpoints is encouraged, but comments must be civil and in good taste, with no personal attacks. Because only subscribers are allowed to comment, we have your personal information and are able to contact you. If your comments are inappropriate, you may be banned from posting. To report comments that you believe do not follow our guidelines, email commentfeedback@staradvertiser.com.

Leave a comment

Name:

Comment:

Please login to leave a comment.

HanabataDayswrote:

"Hundreds of gallons of water rushed downhill", huh? Good thing it wasn't maybe a thousand gallons, things might have been worse.

on November 6,2013 | 06:12AM

Name:

Comment:

KKawawrote:

Circuit Court ruled that Kilauea Irrigation Company was NOT obligated to defend claims against the State for its failure to regularly inspect the damn. That it was up to the State to defend those claims. The State disagrees with the Circuit Court ruling, and appeals. Yet, Kilauea Irrigation does not even file a brief detailing why the Circuit Court decision was solid and should stand? I have never heard of such a thing. Who represented Kilauea Irrigation in the lawsuit?